CHAP. XIV.] A POSTSCRTPT. 435 



the matter simply to a question of fact. He asserts the 

 principle that those kinds of animals which are potentially 

 contained in nature need not be supposed to be directly and 

 immediately created. In determining what kinds were or 

 were not so contained, he followed the scientific notions of 

 his time as he understood them. He would have written 

 according to the exigencies of science now. 



But this matter is really unmistakable. For so far was 

 Suarez from teaching that all life requires direct creative 

 action, that he speaks of certain creatures, &quot; quae per in- 

 fluentiam coelorum ex putrida materia terrae aut aqua 

 generari solent.&quot; (Ibid. n. 10.) 



It is also interesting to see that (in n. 11) he positively 

 asserts the improbability and incredibility that certain kinds 

 of animals now living were actually created at first at all : 

 &quot; Alias dicendum esset in omnibus speciebus quantumvis im- 

 perfectis aliqua individua in principio fuisse facta quia non 

 est major ratio de quibusdam quani de aliis. Consequens est 

 incredibile&quot; He then instances certain insects, but as far as 

 the principle of evolution in itself is concerned he might as 

 well have selected crocodiles. 



Moreover, with respect to certain vegetable productions, 

 he says (ib. c. vi. n. 1), &quot; an vero hujusmodi herbse sint factse 

 hoc die tantum in potentia vel etiam in actu magis dubitari 

 potest.&quot; Finally, even with regard to the production of 

 animals altogether, he tells us that it was not a real creation 

 (c. x. n. 3), &quot;sed ex prsejacente materia modo tamen proprio 

 auctoris naturaB.&quot; It is strange that Professor Huxley should 

 have overlooked these passages which so directly contradict 

 his assertions. 



Nevertheless these passages are not, let it be recollected, 

 adduced to show that Suarez held the doctrine of evolution, 

 or that he maintained as a fact that species were evolved, 

 except in peculiar cases, or that he took St. Augustin s view 

 as to the fact of creation; but to demonstrate that he di*- 

 tinctly admits principles compatible with evolution, and that 

 even where he asserts direct and immediate divine action, 



2 F 2 



